What's the difference between an 'alpha' test and a 'beta' test ... other than that one comes after the other? We still don't have all the bugs worked out for the alpha version yet; I know this because there have been no new versions released since the last bugs I reported. Is the beta going to be one huge upgrade to take care of all of the unfixed bugs in alpha version? Also, I do have a major concern that the present forum for the alpha team might be wiped out when it is replaced with the beta team; it seems like something similar happened in the past because I know there were some threads that were completely lost, IIRC. My problem with that is that I have never made a list of all the various bugs reported in that forum, which I'd like to eventually go through one at a time ... when I have enough time to do it ... before it is all deleted. And I, for one, am not interested in having to re-create descriptions -- or repeat long discussions -- of any bugs that might still exist as a carry over from the alpha version, if the beta team forum somehow replaces the alpha team forum.

As for the original post, the inventory feature in the alpha version works very well and I don't think anyone is going to be disappointed at all. I'd also recommend that users who might be impatient for such features join the beta team; the warning by BTP staff that essentually you will be taking a chance because it is possibly unstable is, in my opinion, standard 'cover your arse' stuff, because I haven't found any instability at all (running Windows XP), and have really enjoyed the new features. I really would have been kicking myself if I had missed joining the team; of course, you are expected to try to help by reporting bugs, etc.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

Last edited by billvelek on Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well, I imagine Jeff or Lathe can assist you with that at this point, because I don't know if every owner of BTP is invited. I have received a couple of invitations via email, but I don't know if everyone on their mailing list got one or if it was just the members of the alpha team. It could be that they want to deliberately limit the size of the team, and it could be that they want only experienced users in order to avoid false alarms due to incorrect usage rather than actual bugs. If that's the case, I think it might be a good idea, as a compromise of sorts, to release the alpha-version as a regular upgrade to the current version 1.0 instead of waiting to release those with v. 1.1, and they could still limit the beta version to their limited team. Hopefully they'll see this and respond to your question.

billvelek wrote:What's the difference between an 'alpha' test and a 'beta' test ... other than that one comes after the other? We still don't have all the bugs worked out for the alpha version yet; I know this because there have been no new versions released since the last bugs I reported.

Sometimes we don't consider bugs what you consider bugs Bill. Here's how we view it: missing features are not bugs, neither are features that are scheduled for improvement. A bug is a failure, flaw, mistake, or fault in a program originating in the source code or the compiler that causes a program to function incorrectly, crash or produce false results. I think all of us agree that there are features that require design improvements, but some of these will have to wait because they don't significantly impair the function of the program or produce erroneous results. The beta version of the software will still be feature incomplete but will include a few more things than the alpha release. The beta program will reveal the bugs and these will be addressed first. Hopefully we will also have time to work on a few of the feature improvements and requests too. I have a few more things to complete with the beta and then instructions will be provided on how to obtain it. Thanks for your patience.

billvelek wrote:What's the difference between an 'alpha' test and a 'beta' test ... other than that one comes after the other? We still don't have all the bugs worked out for the alpha version yet; I know this because there have been no new versions released since the last bugs I reported.

Sometimes we don't consider bugs what you consider bugs Bill. ... snip ... A bug is a failure, flaw, mistake, or fault in a program ... snip

Understood! But in my opinion, when a program is displaying false information, or a segment is not working like every other similar segment in the program, then those are BUGS. Maybe you don't know that I've reported bugs because you don't bother to read my posts ... or are just ignoring them.

For example, on November 11th I reported a problem with the 'Editor' screen for Yeasts; no one at BTP has even had the courtesy of acknowledging the problem (this is far from the first time I've been completely ignored although I'm providing a valuable service to BTP for free). I've just checked, and the problem STILL exists after more than 3 MONTHS, and while it isn't all that big of a deal, it is still a _BUG_ because the program clearly FAILS to do something it is supposed to be able to do. Although it is a minor flaw that we can live with and it deserves low priority, it is still technically a BUG that I don't want to get 'lost' since I did take the time to report it.

Then on January 20th -- 26 days ago -- I posted a message confirming a bug that 'jawbox' had reported -- truncated (missing) information about the schedule when the recipe is printed; I believe I provided a bit more detail about the problem. It is clearly a BUG -- and a very important and irritating one because ... despite printing my recipe ... I still need to manually write down the volume and temperatures of some of my infusions; my post still remains unacknowledged by BTP (that's okay since Jeff had previously replied to jawbox'es bug report, but a simple "Okay" to me would have been nice). I mentioned that same bug again in a different thread on January 26th, but was again ignored; ironically, in that post I had also complained about Jeff and Lathe's chronic failure to respond, stating:

I don't blame other members for not responding, because they have no responsibility to do that; I do, however, have a BIG problem with Jeff and Lathe not doing it. Now, I'm always willing to consider that they might have been unavailable, but my post was on January 21st and Jeff posted in another thread later on that same day and then again on January 24th. Not getting around to fixing the bug is one thing; customer relations is another. I know that I have often been a pain in the butt with my complaints, but I have done an awful lot of their work for them for free, too, and this sort of treatment irritates me even more than the bug itself.

Jeff then posted a message about a half-hour later, right behind mine, without so much as a word about me or my post. But my post did get this reply from 'just-cj':

I'll try to keep up a little better with making comments -- but let me just say again, Bill, that I feel your frustration, I really do! (emphasis added)

... so I'm apparently not alone.

Another example is that on January 21st -- 25 days ago -- I reported what looks like a bug to me; unlike everything else I have in inventory, and everything else that is in the ingredients database, all of which can be added to a recipe by dragging the item, it is impossible to drag minerals or water from either 'My Ingedients' or 'Ingredient DB', ... even though I can add 'Rat Poison' to my other folders and easily drag it into a recipe. I'd pretty much consider that a "failure" in the program, and therefore a BUG. For people using version 1.0, that doesn't make sense, but it will for those with the latest alpha; that bug was later confirmed by user 'just-cj', but the BTP staff never acknowledged either one of us -- just dead silence again -- and it still isn't fixed.

On January 27th -- 19 days ago -- I reported a 'refresh' problem in BTP when the "Stage" is changed for hops. Two other users -- slothrob and Bob57702 -- each confirmed on that same day that their MAC and PC have the same problem; displaying incorrect information on the screen after a change is made constitutes a BUG in my definition book. And after 19 days the BTP staff still hasn't acknowledged my post or the ones by slothrob or Bob57702.

I haven't taken the VAST amount of time that it would no doubt take to go back through the MANY bug reports to sort out which ones are legitimately "bugs" by your definition, Jeff, or are just very good recommendations and requests that really ought to be implemented (including a decent 'Help' file that I've been requesting for about 16 months now ... since buying BTP). I am, however, pretty sure that there are additional "bugs" that still remain unfixed, too.

Sorry to hear that the lack of a Help file has kept you from using BTP much. Is there anything that I can do to help? I use BTP every time I brew -- a couple times a month.

For newbies to the program, all I can say is that the program is very powerful once you master it, and I still have some great expectations despite my earlier criticisms of Jeff and Lathe, which I'm not trying to retract at all. Unfortunately, unless you are particularly gifted, I think a lot of time and work will be necessary for you to truly 'master' the program. On the surface, many things are certainly intuitive ... as software should be ... but when you get deeper into the program, there are many things that are not intuitve in the least bit yet they are not even mentioned in the Help file. Fortunately, there are members here who are very helpful with questions.

Bill, thanks for the offer -- I have most of next month off from school, so I'll spend some time with the alpha version and see if I can't get it to work for my next few recipes. If/When I run into trouble, I'll give you a shout!